BILL NUMBER: SB 1662	CHAPTERED  09/26/00

	CHAPTER   656
	FILED WITH SECRETARY OF STATE   SEPTEMBER 26, 2000
	APPROVED BY GOVERNOR   SEPTEMBER 24, 2000
	PASSED THE SENATE   SEPTEMBER 1, 2000
	PASSED THE ASSEMBLY   AUGUST 31, 2000
	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY   AUGUST 31, 2000
	AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY   AUGUST 30, 2000

INTRODUCED BY   Senator Burton

                        FEBRUARY 22, 2000

   An act to amend Sections 14556.5, 14556.26, 14556.40, 14556.50,
and 14556.52 of, to add Section 14556.29 to, and to repeal Section
14556.40 of, the Government Code, to amend Section 7104 of the
Revenue and Taxation Code, to amend Sections 2182 and 2182.1 of the
Streets and Highways Code, and to repeal Section 21 of Chapter 91 of
the Statutes of 2000, relating to transportation, making an
appropriation therefor, and declaring the urgency thereof, to take
effect immediately.


	LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


   SB 1662, Burton.   Transportation:  finance.
   (1) Existing law establishes the Traffic Congestion Relief Fund
(hereafter the TCRF) in the State Treasury and appropriates the money
in the TCRF (a) to the Department of Transportation for allocation,
as directed by the California Transportation Commission, to the
department and certain regional and local transportation entities for
certain listed transportation projects, (b) to the Controller for
allocation to cities, counties, and cities and counties for street
and road maintenance, rehabilitation, and reconstruction, (c) to the
commission for the purposes of a specified funding exchange program,
and (d) to the department for rehabilitation and repaving projects on
state highways.  Existing law establishes a list of transportation
projects eligible for funding with money from the TCRF, specifies the
lead applicant for each project, and establishes a procedure for the
lead applicant to apply to the commission for funds for each
project.
   Existing law requires the Controller to transfer specified amounts
on a quarterly basis from the General Fund to the Transportation
Investment Fund (hereafter the TIF) in the State Treasury.  The
Controller, for each quarter during the period commencing on July 1,
2001, and ending on June 30, 2006, is required to transfer specified
amounts from the TIF to the TCRF, to the Public Transportation
Account, a trust fund in the State Transportation Fund, to the
Department of Transportation, to the counties, including a city and
county, and to the cities, including a city and county, for specified
transportation purposes.  Funds transferred to counties, cities, and
cities and counties are required to be deposited in certain local
accounts, as specified, in order to avoid the commingling of those
funds with other local funds and may be used only for street and
highway maintenance, rehabilitation, reconstruction, and storm damage
repair, as defined.  Cities, counties, and cities and counties are
required to maintain their existing commitment of local funds for
street and highway maintenance, rehabilitation, reconstruction, and
storm damage repair in order to remain eligible for allocation of the
specified funds.
   This bill would make technical and clarifying corrections in these
provisions, including changing the lead agency for certain
transportation projects on the specified project list.
   The bill would require the Controller to develop a system that
provides access to funds allocated by the commission from the TCRF by
electronic transfer of funds.
   The bill would make an appropriation by adding a project to the
transportation project list and specifying the amount to be allocated
to that project.
   The bill would appropriate $13,900,000 from the Public
Transportation Account in the State Transportation Fund to the
Capitol Corridor Joint Powers Authority and the Bay Area Water
Transit Authority, in specified scheduled amounts and for specific
purposes.
   The bill would declare that it is to take effect immediately as an
urgency statute.
   Appropriation:  yes.


THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:


  SECTION 1.  Section 14556.5 of the Government Code is amended to
read:
   14556.5.  The Traffic Congestion Relief Fund is hereby created in
the State Treasury.  The fund shall include deposits of funds
provided in the annual Budget Act, provided from the Transportation
Investment Fund established under Section 7104 of the Revenue and
Taxation Code, or provided under any other statute.  Notwithstanding
Section 13340, the money in the fund is hereby continuously
appropriated to the department, without regard to fiscal years, as
follows:
   (a) For allocation by the department, as directed by the
commission pursuant to Section 14556.20, to the department and other
regional and local transportation entities for the projects listed in
Article 5 (commencing with Section 14556.40).
   (b) For allocation by the Controller, the sum of four hundred
million dollars ($400,000,000), for allocation during the 2000-01
fiscal year to cities, counties, and cities and counties pursuant to
Section 2182 of the Streets and Highways Code.
   (c) For allocation by the commission to the funding exchange
program authorized by Section 182.8 of the Streets and Highways Code.

  SEC. 2.  Section 14556.26 of the Government Code is amended to
read:
   14556.26.  A regional or local agency receiving an allocation from
this program shall certify, by resolution of its governing board,
before final execution of the cooperative agreement, that it will
sustain its level of expenditures for transportation purposes at a
level that is consistent with the average of its annual expenditures
during the 1997-98, 1998-99, and 1999-2000 fiscal years, including
funds reserved for transportation purposes, during the fiscal years
that the allocation provided under this chapter is available for use.
  The certification is subject to audit by the state.
  SEC. 3.  Section 14556.29 is added to the Government Code, to read:

   14556.29.  The Controller shall develop a system that provides
access to funds allocated by the commission under this article from
the Traffic Congestion Relief Fund by electronic transfer of funds.
  SEC. 4.  Section 14556.40 of the Government Code, as added by
Section 1 of Chapter 92 of the Statutes of 2000, is repealed.
  SEC. 5.  Section 14556.40 of the Government Code, as added by
Section 6 of Chapter 91 of the Statutes of 2000, is amended to read:

   14556.40.  (a) The following projects are eligible for grants from
the fund for the purposes and amounts specified:
   (1) BART to San Jose; extend BART from Fremont to Downtown San
Jose in Santa Clara and Alameda Counties.  Seven hundred twenty-five
million dollars ($725,000,000).  The lead applicant is the Santa
Clara Valley Transportation Authority.
   (2) Fremont-South Bay Commuter Rail; acquire rail line and start
commuter rail service between Fremont and San Jose in Santa Clara and
Alameda Counties.  Thirty-five million dollars ($35,000,000).  The
lead applicant is the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority.
   (3) Route 101; widen freeway from four to eight lanes south of San
Jose, Bernal Road to Burnett Avenue in Santa Clara County.
Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000).  The lead applicant is the
department or the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority.
   (4) Route 680; add northbound HOV lane over Sunol Grade, Milpitas
to Route 84 in Santa Clara and Alameda Counties.  Sixty million
dollars ($60,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the
Alameda County Congestion Management Agency.
   (5) Route 101; add northbound lane to freeway through San Jose,
Route 87 to Trimble Road in Santa Clara County.  Five million dollars
($5,000,000). The lead applicant is the department or the Santa
Clara Valley Transportation Authority.
   (6) Route 262; major investment study for cross connector freeway,
Route 680 to Route 880 near Warm Springs in Santa Clara County.  One
million dollars ($1,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department
or the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority.
   (7) CalTrain; expand service to Gilroy; improve parking, stations,
and platforms along UPRR line in Santa Clara County.  Fifty-five
million dollars ($55,000,000).  The lead applicant is Santa Clara
Valley Transportation Authority.
   (8) Route 880; reconstruct Coleman Avenue Interchange near San
Jose Airport in Santa Clara County.  Five million dollars
($5,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the Santa
Clara Valley Transportation Authority.
   (9) Capitol Corridor; improve intercity rail line between Oakland
and San Jose, and at Jack London Square and Emeryville stations in
Alameda and Santa Clara Counties.  Twenty-five million dollars
($25,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the Capitol
Corridor Joint Powers Authority.
   (10) Regional Express Bus; acquire low-emission buses for new
express service on HOV lanes regionwide.  In nine counties.  Forty
million dollars ($40,000,000).  The lead applicant is the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission.
   (11) San Francisco Bay Southern Crossing; complete feasibility and
financial studies for new San Francisco Bay crossing (new bridge,
HOV/transit bridge, terminal connection, or second BART tube) in
Alameda and San Francisco or San Mateo Counties.  Five million
dollars ($5,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the
Metropolitan Transportation Commission.
   (12) Bay Area Transit Connectivity; complete studies of, and fund
related improvements for, the I-580 Livermore Corridor; the Hercules
Rail Station and related improvements, West Contra Costa County and
Route 4 Corridors in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties.  Seventeen
million dollars ($17,000,000).  Of the amount specified, seven
million dollars ($7,000,000) shall be made available for the Route 4
Corridor study and improvements, seven million dollars ($7,000,000)
shall be made available for the I-580 Corridor study and
improvements, and three million dollars ($3,000,000) shall be made
available for the Hercules Rail Station study and improvements.  The
lead applicant for the Hercules Rail Station and related improvements
in west Contra Costa County is the Contra Costa County
Transportation Authority.  The lead applicants, for the I-580
Livermore Study and improvements are the Alameda County Congestion
Management Authority and the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit
District.  The lead applicants for the Route 4 Corridor study and
improvements are the Contra Costa County Transportation Authority and
the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District.
   (13) CalTrain Peninsula Corridor; acquire rolling stock, add
passing tracks, and construct pedestrian access structure at stations
between San Francisco and San Jose in San Francisco, San Mateo, and
Santa Clara Counties.  One hundred twenty-seven million dollars
($127,000,000).  The lead applicant is the Peninsula Joint Powers
Board.
   (14) CalTrain; extension to Salinas in Monterey County.  Twenty
million dollars ($20,000,000).  The lead applicant is the
Transportation Agency for Monterey County.
   (15) Route 24; Caldecott Tunnel; add fourth bore tunnel with
additional lanes in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties.  Twenty
million dollars ($20,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department
or the Metropolitan Transportation Commission.
   (16) Route 4; construct one or more phases of improvements to
widen freeway to eight lanes from Railroad through Loveridge Road,
including two high-occupancy vehicle lanes, and to six or more lanes
from east of Loveridge Road through Hillcrest.  Thirty-nine million
dollars ($39,000,000).  The lead applicant is the Contra Costa
Transportation Authority.
   (17) Route 101; add reversible HOV lane through San Rafael, Sir
Francis Drake Boulevard to North San Pedro Road in Marin County.
Fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000).  The lead applicant is the
department or the Marin Congestion Management Agency.
   (18) Route 101; widen eight miles of freeway to six lanes, Novato
to Petaluma (Novato Narrows) in Marin and Sonoma Counties.
Twenty-one million dollars ($21,000,000).  The lead applicant is the
department or the Sonoma County Transportation Authority.
   (19) Bay Area Water Transit Authority; establish a regional water
transit system beginning with Treasure Island in the City and County
of San Francisco.  Two million dollars ($2,000,000).  The lead
applicant is the Bay Area Water Transit Authority.
   (20) San Francisco Muni Third Street Light Rail; extend Third
Street line to Chinatown (tunnel) in the City and County of San
Francisco.  One hundred forty million dollars ($140,000,000).  The
lead applicant is the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency.

   (21) San Francisco Muni Ocean Avenue Light Rail; reconstruct Ocean
Avenue light rail line to Route 1 near California State University,
San Francisco, in the City and County of San Francisco.  Seven
million dollars ($7,000,000).  The lead applicant is the San
Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency.
   (22) Route 101; environmental study for reconstruction of Doyle
Drive, from Lombard St./Richardson Avenue to Route 1 Interchange in
City and County of San Francisco.  Fifteen million dollars
($15,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the San
Francisco County Transportation Authority.
   (23) CalTrain Peninsula Corridor; complete grade separations at
Poplar Avenue in (San Mateo), 25th Avenue or vicinity (San Mateo),
and Linden Avenue (South San Francisco) in San Mateo County.  Fifteen
million dollars ($15,000,000).  The lead applicant is the San Mateo
County Transportation Authority.
   (24) Vallejo Baylink Ferry; acquire low-emission ferryboats to
expand Baylink Vallejo-San Francisco service in Solano County.  Five
million dollars ($5,000,000).  The lead applicant is the City of
Vallejo.
   (25) I-80/I-680/Route 12 Interchange in Fairfield in Solano
County; 12 interchange complex in seven stages (Stage 1).  Thirteen
million dollars ($13,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department
or the Solano Transportation Authority.
   (26) ACE Commuter Rail; add siding on UPRR line in Livermore
Valley in Alameda County.  One million dollars ($1,000,000).  The
lead applicant is the Alameda County Congestion Management Authority.

   (27) Vasco Road Safety and Transit Enhancement Project in Alameda
and Contra Costa Counties.  Eleven million dollars ($11,000,000).
The lead applicant is Alameda County Congestion Management Authority.

   (28) Parking Structure at Transit Village at Richmond BART Station
in Contra Costa County.  Five million dollars ($5,000,000).  The
lead applicant is the City of Richmond.
   (29) AC Transit; buy two fuel cell buses and fueling facility for
demonstration project in Alameda and Contra Costa Counties.  Eight
million dollars ($8,000,000).  The lead applicant is the Alameda
Contra Costa Transit District.
   (30) Implementation of commuter rail passenger service from
Cloverdale south to San Rafael and Larkspur in Marin and Sonoma
Counties.  Thirty-seven million dollars ($37,000,000).  The lead
applicant is the Sonoma-Marin Area Transit Authority.
   (31) Route 580; construct eastbound and westbound HOV lanes from
Tassajara Road/Santa Rita Road to Vasco Road in Alameda County.
Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000).  The lead applicant is the
department or the Alameda County Congestion Management Authority.
   (32) North Coast Railroad; repair and upgrade track to meet Class
II (freight) standards in Napa, Sonoma, Marin, Mendocino and Humboldt
Counties.  Sixty million dollars ($60,000,000).  The lead applicant
is the North Coast Rail Authority.  Except for the amounts specified
in paragraph (1) of subdivision (a) and subdivision (b) of Section
14456.50, no part of the specified amount may be made available to
the authority until it has made a full accounting to the commission
demonstrating that the expenditure of funds provided to the authority
in the Budget Act of 2000 (Chapter 52 of the Statutes of 2000) was
consistent with the limitations placed on those funds in that Budget
Act.
   (33) Bus Transit; acquire low-emission buses for Los Angeles
County MTA bus transit service.  One hundred fifty million dollars
($150,000,000).  The lead applicant is the Los Angeles County
Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
   (34) Blue Line to Los Angeles; new rail line Pasadena to Los
Angeles in Los Angeles County.  Forty million dollars ($40,000,000).
The lead applicant is the Pasadena Metro Blue Line Construction
Authority.
   (35) Pacific Surfliner; triple track intercity rail line within
Los Angeles County and add run-through-tracks through Los Angeles
Union Station in Los Angeles County.  One hundred million dollars
($100,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department.
   (36) Los Angeles Eastside Transit Extension; build new light rail
line in East Los Angeles, from Union Station to Atlantic via 1st
Street to Lorena in Los Angeles County.  Two hundred thirty-six
million dollars ($236,000,000).  The lead applicant is the Los
Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
   (37) Los Angeles Mid-City Transit Improvements; build Bus Rapid
Transit system or Light Rail Transit in Mid-City/Westside/Exposition
Corridors in Los Angeles County.  Two hundred fifty-six million
dollars ($256,000,000).  The lead applicant is the Los Angeles County
Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
   (38) Los Angeles-San Fernando Valley Transit Extension; (A) build
an East-West Bus Rapid Transit system in the Burbank-Chandler
corridor, from North Hollywood to Warner Center.  One hundred
forty-five million dollars ($145,000,000).  (B) Build a North-South
corridor bus transit project that interfaces with the foregoing
East-West Burbank-Chandler Corridor project and with the Ventura
Boulevard Rapid Bus project.  One hundred million dollars
($100,000,000).  The lead applicant for both extension projects is
the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
   (39) Route 405; add northbound HOV lane over Sepulveda Pass, Route
10 to Route 101 in Los Angeles County.  Ninety million dollars
($90,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the Los
Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
   (40) Route 10; add HOV lanes on San Bernardino Freeway over
Kellogg Hill, near Pomona, Route 605 to Route 57 in Los Angeles
County.  Ninety million dollars ($90,000,000).  The lead applicant is
the department or the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation
Authority.
   (41) Route 5; add HOV lanes on Golden State Freeway through San
Fernando Valley, Route 170 (Hollywood Freeway) to Route 14 (Antelope
Valley Freeway) in Los Angeles County.  Fifty million dollars
($50,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the Los
Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
   (42) Route 5; widen Santa Ana Freeway to 10 lanes (two HOV + two
mixed flow), Orange County line to Route 710, with related major
arterial improvements, in Los Angeles County.  One hundred
twenty-five million dollars ($125,000,000).  The lead applicant is
the department or the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation
Authority.
   (43) Route 5; improve Carmenita Road Interchange in Norwalk in Los
Angeles County.  Seventy-one million dollars ($71,000,000).  The
lead applicant is the department or the Los Angeles County
Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
   (44) Route 47 (Terminal Island Freeway); construct interchange at
Ocean Boulevard Overpass in the City of Long Beach in Los Angeles
County.  Eighteen million four hundred thousand dollars
($18,400,000).  The lead applicant is the Port of Long Beach.
   (45) Route 710; complete Gateway Corridor study, Los Angeles/Long
Beach ports to Route 5 in Los Angeles County.  Two million dollars
($2,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department.
   (46) Route 1; reconstruct intersection at Route 107 in Torrance in
Los Angeles County.  Two million dollars ($2,000,000).  The lead
applicant is the department or the Los Angeles County Metropolitan
Transportation Authority.
   (47) Route 101; California Street off-ramp in Ventura County.
Fifteen million dollars ($15,000,000).  The lead applicant is the
department or the City of San Buenaventura.
   (48) Route 101; corridor analysis and PSR to improve corridor from
Route 170 (North Hollywood Freeway) to Route 23 in Thousand Oaks
(Ventura County) in Los Angeles and Ventura Counties.  Three million
dollars ($3,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department.
   (49) Hollywood Intermodal Transportation Center; intermodal
facility at Highland Avenue and Hawthorn Avenue in the City of Los
Angeles.  Ten million dollars ($10,000,000).  The lead applicant is
the City of Los Angeles.
   (50) Route 71; complete three miles of six-lane freeway through
Pomona, from Route 10 to Route 60 in Los Angeles County.  Thirty
million dollars ($30,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department
or the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
   (51) Route 101/405; add auxiliary lane and widen ramp through
freeway interchange in Sherman Oaks in Los Angeles County.
Twenty-one million dollars ($21,000,000).  The lead applicant is the
department or the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation
Authority.
   (52) Route 405; add HOV and auxiliary lanes for 1 mile in West Los
Angeles, from Waterford Avenue to Route 10 in Los Angeles County.
Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000). The lead applicant is the
department or the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation
Authority.
   (53) Automated Signal Corridors (ATSAC); improve 479 automated
signals in Victory/Ventura Corridor, and add 76 new automated signals
in Sepulveda Boulevard and Route 118 Corridors in Los Angeles
County.  Sixteen million dollars ($16,000,000).  The lead applicant
is the City of Los Angeles.
   (54) Alameda Corridor East; build grade separations on Burlington
Northern-Santa Fe and Union Pacific Railroad lines, downtown Los
Angeles to Los Angeles County line in Los Angeles County.  One
hundred fifty million dollars ($150,000,000).  The lead applicant is
the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments.
   (55) Alameda Corridor East; build grade separations on Burlington
Northern-Santa Fe and Union Pacific Railroad lines, with rail-to-rail
separation at Colton through San Bernardino County.  Ninety-five
million dollars ($95,000,000).  The lead applicant is the San
Bernardino Associated Governments.
   (56) Metrolink; track and signal improvements on Metrolink; San
Bernardino line in San Bernardino County.  Fifteen million dollars
($15,000,000).  The lead applicant is the Southern California
Regional Rail Authority.
   (57) Route 215; add HOV lanes through downtown San Bernardino,
Route 10 to Route 30 in San Bernardino County.  Twenty-five million
dollars ($25,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the
San Bernardino County Transportation Commission.
   (58) Route 10; widen freeway to eight lanes through Redlands,
Route 30 to Ford Street in San Bernardino County.  Ten million
dollars ($10,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the
San Bernardino County Transportation Commission.
   (59) Route 10; Live Oak Canyon Interchange, including, but not
limited to, the 14th Street Bridge over Wilson Creek, in the City of
Yucaipa in San Bernardino County.  Eleven million dollars
($11,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the San
Bernardino County Transportation Commission.
   (60) Route 15; southbound truck climbing lane at two locations in
San Bernardino County.  Ten million dollars ($10,000,000).  The lead
applicant is the department or the San Bernardino County
Transportation Commission.
   (61) Route 10; reconstruct Apache Trail Interchange east of
Banning in Riverside County.  Thirty million dollars ($30,000,000).
The lead applicant is the department or the Riverside County
Transportation Commission.
   (62) Route 91; add HOV lanes through downtown Riverside, Mary
Street to Route 60/215 junction in Riverside County.  Forty million
dollars ($40,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the
Riverside County Transportation Commission.
   (63) Route 60; add seven miles of HOV lanes west of Riverside,
Route 15 to Valley Way in Riverside County.  Twenty-five million
dollars ($25,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the
Riverside County Transportation Commission.
   (64) Route 91; improve the Green River Interchange and add
auxiliary lane and connector ramp east of the Green River Interchange
to northbound Route 71 in Riverside County.  Five million dollars
($5,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the Riverside
County Transportation Commission.
   (70) Route 22; add HOV lanes on Garden Grove Freeway, Route I-405
to Route 55 in Orange County.  Two hundred six million five hundred
thousand dollars ($206,500,000).  The lead applicant is the
department or the Orange County Transportation Authority.
   (73) Alameda Corridor East; (Orangethorpe Corridor) build grade
separations on Burlington Northern-Santa Fe line, Los Angeles County
line through Santa Ana Canyon in Orange County.  Twenty-eight million
dollars ($28,000,000).  The lead applicant is the Orange County
Transportation Authority.
   (74) Pacific Surfliner; double track intercity rail line within
San Diego County, add maintenance yard in San Diego County.
Forty-seven million dollars ($47,000,000).  The lead applicant is the
department or North Coast Transit District.
   (75) San Diego Transit Buses; acquire about 85 low-emission buses
for San Diego transit service in San Diego County.  Thirty million
dollars ($30,000,000).  The lead applicant is the San Diego
Metropolitan Transit Development Board.
   (76) Coaster Commuter Rail; acquire one new train set to expand
commuter rail in San Diego County.  Fourteen million dollars
($14,000,000).  The lead applicant is North County Transit District.

   (77) Route 94; complete environmental studies to add capacity to
Route 94 corridor, downtown San Diego to Route 125 in Lemon Grove in
San Diego County.  Twenty million dollars ($20,000,000).  The lead
applicant is the department or San Diego Association of Governments.

   (78) East Village access; improve access to light rail from new
in-town East Village development in San Diego County.  Fifteen
million dollars ($15,000,000).  The lead applicant is the San Diego
Metropolitan Transit Development Board.
   (79) North County Light Rail; build new 20-mile light rail line
from Oceanside to Escondido in San Diego County.  Eighty million
dollars ($80,000,000).  The lead applicant is North County Transit
District.
   (80) Mid-Coast Light Rail; extend Old Town light rail line 6 miles
to Balboa Avenue in San Diego County.  Ten million dollars
($10,000,000).  The lead applicant is the San Diego Metropolitan
Transit Development Board.
   (81) San Diego Ferry; acquire low-emission high-speed ferryboat
for new off-coast service between San Diego and Oceanside in San
Diego County.  Five million dollars ($5,000,000).  The lead applicant
is the Port of San Diego.
   (82) Routes 5/805; reconstruct and widen freeway interchange,
Genesee Avenue to Del Mar Heights Road in San Diego County.
Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000).  The lead applicant is the
department or the San Diego Association of Governments.
   (83) Route 15; add high-tech managed lane on I-15 freeway north of
San Diego (Stage 1) from Route 163 to Route 78 in San Diego County.
Seventy million dollars ($70,000,000).  The lead applicant is the
department or the San Diego Association of Governments.
   (84) Route 52; build four miles of new six-lane freeway to Santee,
Mission Gorge to Route 67 in San Diego County.  Forty-five million
dollars ($45,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the
San Diego Association of Governments.
   (85) Route 56; construct approximately five miles of new freeway
alignment between I-5 and I-15 from Carmel Valley to Rancho
Penasquitos in the City of San Diego in San Diego County.
Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000).  The lead applicant is the
department or the San Diego Association of Governments.
   (86) Route 905; build new six-lane freeway on Otay Mesa, Route 805
to Mexico Port of Entry in San Diego County.  Twenty-five million
dollars ($25,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the
San Diego Association of Governments.
   (87) Routes 94/125; build two new freeway connector ramps at Route
94/125 in Lemon Grove in San Diego County.  Sixty million dollars
($60,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the San Diego
Association of Governments.
   (88) Route 5; realign freeway at Virginia Avenue, approaching San
Ysidro Port of Entry to Mexico in San Diego County.  Ten million
dollars ($10,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the
San Diego Association of Governments.
   (89) Route 99; improve Shaw Avenue Interchange in northern Fresno
in Fresno County.  Five million dollars ($5,000,000).  The lead
applicant is the department or the Council of Fresno County
Governments.
   (90) Route 99; widen freeway to six lanes, Kingsburg to Selma in
Fresno County.  Twenty million dollars ($20,000,000).  The lead
applicant is the department or the Council of Fresno County
Governments.
   (91) Route 180; build new expressway east of Clovis, Clovis Avenue
to Temperance Avenue in Fresno County.  Twenty million dollars
($20,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the Council
of Fresno County Governments.
   (92) San Joaquin Corridor; improve track and signals along San
Joaquin intercity rail line near Hanford in Kings County.  Ten
million dollars ($10,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department.

   (93) Route 180; complete environmental studies to extend Route 180
westward from Mendota to I-5 in Fresno County.  Seven million
dollars ($7,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the
Council of Fresno County Governments.
   (94) Route 43; widen to four-lane expressway from Kings County
line to Route 99 in Selma in Fresno County.  Five million dollars
($5,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the Council of
Fresno County Governments.
   (95) Route 41; add auxiliary lane/operational improvements and
improve ramps at Friant Road Interchange in Fresno in Fresno County.
Ten million dollars ($10,000,000).  The lead applicant is the
department or the Council of Fresno County Governments.
   (96) Friant Road; widen to four lanes from Copper Avenue to Road
206 in Fresno County.  Ten million dollars ($10,000,000).  The lead
applicant is the County of Fresno.
   (97) Operational improvements on Shaw Avenue, Chestnut Avenue,
Willow Avenue, and Barstow Avenue near California State University at
Fresno in Fresno County.  Ten million dollars ($10,000,000).
                                      The lead applicant is the
California State University at Fresno.  Of the amount authorized
under this paragraph, the sum of two million dollars ($2,000,000)
shall be transferred to the California State University at Fresno for
the purposes of funding preliminary plans, working drawings, or both
of those, and related program management costs for the Fresno Events
Center.
   (98) Peach Avenue; widen to four-lane arterial and add pedestrian
overcrossings for three schools in Fresno County.  Ten million
dollars ($10,000,000).  The lead applicant is the City of Fresno.
   (99) San Joaquin Corridor; improve track and signals along San
Joaquin intercity rail line in seven counties.  Fifteen million
dollars ($15,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department.
   (100) San Joaquin Valley Emergency Clean Air Attainment Program;
incentives for the reduction of emissions from heavy-duty diesel
engines operating within the eight-county San Joaquin Valley region.
Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000).  The lead applicant is
the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District.
   (101) Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District bus fleet;
acquisition of low-emission buses.  Three million dollars
($3,000,000).  The lead applicant is the Santa Cruz Metropolitan
Transit District.
   (102) Route 101 access; State Street smart corridor Advanced
Traffic Corridor System (ATSC) technology in Santa Barbara County.
One million three hundred thousand dollars ($1,300,000).  The lead
applicant is the City of Santa Barbara.
   (103) Route 99; improve interchange at Seventh Standard Road,
north of Bakersfield in Kern County.  Eight million dollars
($8,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or Kern Council
of Governments.
   (104) Route 99; build seven miles of new six-lane freeway south of
Merced, Buchanan Hollow Road to Healey Road in Merced County.  Five
million dollars ($5,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department
or the Merced County Association of Governments.
   (105) Route 99; build two miles of new six-lane freeway, Madera
County line to Buchanan Hollow Road in Merced County.  Five million
dollars ($5,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the
Merced County Association of Governments.
   (106) Campus Parkway; build new arterial in Merced County from
Route 99 to Bellevue Road.  Twenty-three million dollars
($23,000,000).  The lead applicant is the County of Merced.
   (107) Route 205; widen freeway to six lanes, Tracy to I-5 in San
Joaquin County.  Twenty-five million dollars ($25,000,000).  The lead
applicant is the department or the San Joaquin Council of
Governments.
   (108) Route 5; add northbound lane to freeway through Mossdale "Y"
, Route 205 to Route 120 in San Joaquin County.  Seven million
dollars ($7,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the
San Joaquin Council of Governments.
   (109) Route 132; build four miles of new four-lane expressway in
Modesto from Dakota Avenue to Route 99 and improve Route 99
Interchange in Stanislaus County.  Twelve million dollars
($12,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the
Stanislaus Council of Governments.
   (110) Route 132; build 3.5 miles of new four-lane expressway from
Route 33 to the San Joaquin county line in Stanislaus and San Joaquin
Counties.  Two million dollars ($2,000,000).  The lead applicant is
the department or the Stanislaus Council of Governments.
   (111) Route 198; build 10 miles of new four-lane expressway from
Route 99 to Hanford in Kings and Tulare Counties.  Fourteen million
dollars ($14,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the
Kings County Association of Governments.
   (112) Jersey Avenue; widen from 17th Street to 18th Street in
Kings County.  One million five hundred thousand dollars
($1,500,000).  The lead applicant is Kings County.
   (113) Route 46; widen to four lanes for 33 miles from Route 5 to
San Luis Obispo County line in Kern County.  Thirty million dollars
($30,000,000).  The lead applicant is the department or the Kern
Council of Governments.
   (114) Route 65; add four passing lanes, intersection improvement,
and conduct environmental studies for ultimate widening to four lanes
from Route 99 in Bakersfield to Tulare County line in Kern County.
Twelve million dollars ($12,000,000).  The lead applicant is the
department or the Kern Council of Governments.
   (115) South Line Light Rail; extend South Line three miles towards
Elk Grove, from Meadowview Road to Calvine Road in Sacramento
County.  Seventy million dollars ($70,000,000).  The lead applicant
is the Sacramento Regional Transit District.
   (116) Route 80 Light Rail Corridor; double-track Route 80 light
rail line for express service in Sacramento County.  Twenty-five
million dollars ($25,000,000).  The lead applicant is the Sacramento
Regional Transit District.
   (117) Folsom Light Rail; extend light rail tracks from 7th Street
and K Street to the Amtrak Depot in downtown Sacramento, and extend
Folsom light rail from Mather Field Station to downtown Folsom.  Add
a new vehicle storage and maintenance facility in the area between
the Sunrise Boulevard and Hazel Avenue Stations in Sacramento County.
  Twenty million dollars ($20,000,000). The lead applicant is the
Sacramento Regional Transit District.
   (118) Sacramento Emergency Clean Air/Transportation Plan (SECAT);
incentive for the reduction of emissions from heavy-duty diesel
engines operating within the Sacramento region.  Fifty million
dollars ($50,000,000).  The lead applicant is the Sacramento Area
Council of Governments.
   (119) Convert Sacramento Regional Transit bus fleet to low
emission and provide Yolo bus service by the Yolo County
Transportation District; acquire approximately 50 replacement
low-emission buses for service in Sacramento and Yolo Counties.
Nineteen million dollars ($19,000,000).  The lead applicants are the
Sacramento Regional Transit District, the Sacramento Area Council of
Governments, and the Yolo Bus Authority.
   (121) Metropolitan Bakersfield System Study; to reduce congestion
in the City of Bakersfield.  Three hundred fifty thousand dollars
($350,000).  The lead applicant is the Kern County Council of
Governments.
   (122) Route 65; widening project from 7th Standard Road to Route
190 in Porterville.  Three million five hundred thousand dollars
($3,500,000). The lead applicant is the County of Tulare.
   (123) Oceanside Transit Center; parking structure.  One million
five hundred thousand dollars ($1,500,000).  The lead applicant is
the City of Oceanside.
   (126) Route 50/Watt Avenue Interchange; widening of overcrossing
and modifications to interchange.  Seven million dollars
($7,000,000).  The lead applicant is the County of Sacramento.
   (127) Route 85/Route 87; interchange completion; addition of two
direct connectors for southbound Route 85 to northbound Route 87 and
southbound Route 87 to northbound Route 85.  Three million five
hundred thousand dollars ($3,500,000).  The lead applicant is the
City of San Jose.
   (128) Airport Road; reconstruction and intersection improvement
project. Three million dollars ($3,000,000).  The lead applicant is
the County of Shasta.
   (129) Route 62; traffic and pedestrian safety and utility
undergrounding project in right-of-way of Route 62.  Three million
two hundred thousand dollars ($3,200,000).  The lead applicant is the
Town of Yucca Valley.
   (133) Feasibility studies for grade separation projects for Union
Pacific Railroad at Elk Grove Boulevard and Bond Road.  One hundred
fifty thousand dollars ($150,000).  The lead applicant is the City of
Elk Grove.
   (134) Route 50/Sunrise Boulevard; interchange modifications.
Three million dollars ($3,000,000).  The lead applicant is the County
of Sacramento.
   (135) Route 99/Sheldon Road; interchange project; reconstruction
and expansion.  Three million dollars ($3,000,000).  The lead
applicant is the County of Sacramento.
   (138) Cross Valley Rail; upgrade track from Visalia to Huron.
Four million dollars ($4,000,000).  The lead applicant is the Cross
Valley Rail Corridor Joint Powers Authority.
   (139) Balboa Park BART Station; phase I expansion.  Six million
dollars ($6,000,000).  The lead applicant is the San Francisco Bay
Area Rapid Transit District.
   (140) City of Goshen; overpass for Route 99.  One million five
hundred thousand dollars ($1,500,000).  The lead applicant is the
department.
   (141) Union City; pedestrian bridge over Union Pacific rail lines.
  Two million dollars ($2,000,000).  The lead applicant is the City
of Union City.
   (142) West Hollywood; repair, maintenance, and mitigation of Santa
Monica Boulevard.  Two million dollars ($2,000,000).  The lead
applicant is the City of West Hollywood.
   (144) Seismic retrofit of the national landmark Golden Gate
Bridge.  Five million dollars ($5,000,000).  The lead applicant is
the Golden Gate Bridge, Highway and Transportation District.
   (145) Construction of a new siding in Sun Valley between Sheldon
Street and Sunland Boulevard.  Six million five hundred thousand
dollars ($6,500,000).  The lead applicant is the Southern California
Regional Rail Authority.
   (146) Construction of Palm Drive Interchange.  Ten million dollars
($10,000,000).  The lead applicant is the Coachella Valley
Association of Governments.
   (148) Route 98; widening of 8 miles between Route 111 and Route 7
from 2 lanes to 4 lanes.  Ten million dollars ($10,000,000).  The
lead applicant is the department.
   (149) Purchase of low-emission buses for express service on Route
17.  Three million seven hundred fifty thousand dollars ($3,750,000).
  The lead applicant is the Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transit District.

   (150) Renovation or rehabilitation of Santa Cruz Metro Center.
One million dollars ($1,000,000).  The lead applicant is the Santa
Cruz Metropolitan Transit District.
   (151) Purchase of 5 alternative fuel buses for the Pasadena Area
Rapid Transit System.  One million one hundred thousand dollars
($1,100,000).  The lead applicant is the Pasadena Area Rapid Transit
System.
   (152) Pasadena Blue Line transit-oriented mixed-use development.
One million five hundred thousand dollars ($1,500,000).  The lead
applicant is the City of South Pasadena.
   (153) Pasadena Blue Line utility relocation.  Five hundred fifty
thousand dollars ($550,000).  The lead applicant is the City of South
Pasadena.
   (154) Route 134/I-5 Interchange study.  One hundred thousand
dollars ($100,000).  The lead applicant is the department.
   (156) Seismic retrofit and core segment improvements for the Bay
Area Rapid Transit system.  Twenty million dollars ($20,000,000).
The lead applicant is the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit
District.
   (157) Route 12; Congestion relief improvements from Route 29 to
I-80 through Jamison Canyon.  Seven million dollars ($7,000,000).
The lead applicant is the department.
   (158) Remodel the intersection of Olympic Boulevard, Mateo Street,
and Porter Street and install a new traffic signal.  Two million
dollars ($2,000,000).  The lead applicant is the City of Los Angeles.

   (159) Route 101; redesign and construction of Steele Lane
Interchange. Six million dollars ($6,000,000).  The lead applicant is
the department or the Sonoma County Transportation Authority.
   (b) As used in this section "route" is a state highway route as
identified in Article 3 (commencing with Section 300) of Chapter 2 of
Division 1 of the Streets and Highways Code.
  SEC. 6.  Section 14556.50 of the Government Code is amended to
read:
   14556.50.  The grant authorized under paragraph (32) of
subdivision (a) of Section 14556.40 shall be allocated as follows:
   (a) (1) Two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000) to defray
the administrative costs of the North Coast Railroad Authority,
allocated directly to the authority as directed by the commission at
its first scheduled meeting immediately upon enactment of the Budget
Act of 2000.
   (2) Two hundred fifty thousand dollars ($250,000) to defray the
administrative costs of the authority, allocated directly to the
authority as directed by the commission within six months from the
date of enactment of the Budget Act of 2000.
   (3) Five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) to defray the
administrative costs of the authority, allocated to the authority as
directed by the commission, within one year from the date of
enactment of the Budget Act of 2000, if the commission determines
that additional funding is needed by the authority as directed by the
commission at its first scheduled meeting for administrative costs.

   (b) Six hundred thousand dollars ($600,000) to fund completion of
the authority's rail line from Lombard to Willits, allocated directly
to the authority immediately upon enactment of the Budget Act of
2000.
   (c) One million dollars ($1,000,000) to fund completion of the
authority's rail line from Willits to Arcata, allocated to the
authority as directed by the commission, within six months from the
date of enactment of the Budget Act of 2000.
   (d) Five million dollars ($5,000,000) to fund the upgrade of the
authority's rail line to Class II or III status, allocated to the
authority as directed by the commission.
   (e) Four million one hundred thousand dollars ($4,100,000) for
environmental remediation projects, allocated to the authority as
directed by the commission, within six months from the date of
enactment of the Budget Act of 2000.
   (f) Ten million dollars ($10,000,000) for the authority's debt
reduction, allocated to the authority as directed by the commission,
within six months from the date of enactment of the Budget Act of
2000.
   (g) One million eight hundred thousand dollars ($1,800,000) for
use by the authority as local match funds, allocated to the authority
as directed by the commission.
   (h) Five million five hundred thousand dollars ($5,500,000) to
fund repayment of the authority's federal loan obligations, allocated
to the authority as directed by the commission.
   (i) Thirty-one million dollars ($31,000,000) for long-term
stabilization projects, allocated to the authority as directed by the
commission.
  SEC. 7.  Section 14556.52 of the Government Code is amended to
read:
   14556.52.  (a) Before grants from the fund may be allocated to any
of the three Alameda Corridor East Projects identified in paragraphs
(54), (55), and (73) of subdivision (a) of Section 14556.40, a
report shall be completed and submitted to the commission within one
year of the operative date of this section.  The report shall be
prepared by a team consisting of the lead applicants for those
projects and the Riverside County Transportation Commission.  The
report shall address regional mobility needs as well as regional,
state, and national economic impacts of the corridor.  The team shall
also evaluate and assess the technical merits, determine the phasing
and delivery schedule, and identify a financing strategy for the
proposed corridor improvements.  Based on the good faith
participation of the stakeholders, the commission shall allocate some
or all of the available funds to one or more of the lead applicants
for specific projects within the corridor that meet the requirements
under this chapter.
   (b) Funds may be allocated from the fund to produce the report
required under this section.
  SEC. 8.  Section 7104 of the Revenue and Taxation Code is amended
to read:
   7104.  (a) The Transportation Investment Fund (hereafter the fund)
is hereby created in the State Treasury.  Notwithstanding Section
13340 of the Government Code, the money in the fund is continuously
appropriated without regard to fiscal years for disbursement in the
manner and for the purposes set forth in this section.
   (b) All of the following shall occur on a quarterly basis:
   (1) The State Board of Equalization, in consultation with the
Department of Finance, shall estimate the amount that is transferred
to the General Fund under subdivision (b) of Section 7102 that is
attributable to revenue collected for the sale, storage, use, or
other consumption in this state of motor vehicle fuel, as defined in
Section 7304.
   (2) The State Board of Equalization shall inform the Controller,
in writing, of the amount estimated under paragraph (1).
   (3) The Controller shall transfer the amount estimated under
paragraph (1) from the General Fund to the fund.
   (c) For each quarter during the period commencing on July 1, 2001,
and ending on June 30, 2006, the Controller shall make all of the
following transfers and apportionments from the  funds identified for
transfer under paragraph (2) of subdivision (b) in the following
order:
   (1) To the Traffic Congestion Relief Fund created in the State
Treasury by Section 14556.5 of the Government Code, the sum of one
hundred sixty-nine million five hundred thousand dollars
($169,500,000), for a total transfer of three billion three hundred
ninety million dollars ($3,390,000,000).
   (2) To the Public Transportation Account, a trust fund in the
State Transportation Fund, 20 percent of the amount remaining after
the transfer required under paragraph (1).  Funds transferred under
this paragraph shall be appropriated by the Legislature as follows:
   (A) To the Department of Transportation, 50 percent for purposes
of subdivision (a) or (b) of Section 99315 of the Public Utilities
Code.
   (B) To the Controller, 25 percent for allocation pursuant to
Section 99314 of the Public Utilities Code.  Funds allocated under
this subparagraph shall be subject to all of the provisions governing
funds allocated under Section 99314 of the Public Utilities Code.
   (C) To the Controller, 25 percent for allocation pursuant to
Section 99313 of the Public Utilities Code.  Funds allocated under
this subparagraph shall be subject to all of the provisions governing
funds allocated under Section 99313 of the Public Utilities Code.
   (3) To the Department of Transportation for expenditure for
programming for transportation capital improvement projects subject
to all of the provisions governing the State Transportation
Improvement Program, 40 percent of the amount remaining after the
transfer required under paragraph (1).
   (4) To the Controller for apportionment to the counties, including
a city and county, 20 percent of the amount remaining after the
transfer required under paragraph (1), in accordance with the
following formulas:
   (A) Seventy-five percent of the funds payable under this paragraph
shall be apportioned among the counties in the proportion that the
number of fee-paid and exempt vehicles that are registered in the
county bears to the number of fee-paid and exempt vehicles registered
in the state.
   (B) Twenty-five percent of the funds payable under this paragraph
shall be apportioned among the counties in the proportion that the
number of miles of maintained county roads in each county bears to
the total number of miles of maintained county roads in the state.
For the purposes of apportioning funds under this subparagraph, any
roads within the boundaries of a city and county that are not state
highways shall be deemed to be county roads.
   (5) To the Controller for apportionment to cities, including a
city and county, 20 percent of the amount remaining after the
transfer required under paragraph (1).   Funds transferred under this
paragraph shall be apportioned among the cities in the proportion
that the total population of the city bears to the total population
of all the cities in the state.
   (d) Funds received under paragraphs (4) and (5) of subdivision (c)
shall be deposited as follows in order to avoid the commingling of
those funds with other local funds:
   (1) In the case of a city, into the city account that is
designated for the receipt of state funds allocated for
transportation purposes.
   (2) In the case of a county, into the county road fund.
   (3) In the case of a city and county, into a local account that is
designated for the receipt of state funds allocated for
transportation purposes.
   (e) Funds allocated to a city, county, or city and county under
this section shall be used only for street and highway maintenance,
rehabilitation, reconstruction, and storm damage repair.  For
purposes of this section, the following terms have the following
meanings:
   (1) "Maintenance" means either or both of the following:
   (A) Patching.
   (B) Overlay and sealing.
   (2) "Reconstruction" includes any overlay, sealing, or widening of
the roadway, if the widening is necessary to bring the roadway width
to the desirable minimum width consistent with the geometric design
criteria of the department for 3R (reconstruction, resurfacing, and
rehabilitation) projects that are not on a freeway, but does not
include widening for the purpose of increasing the traffic capacity
of a street or highway.
   (3) "Storm damage repair" is repair or reconstruction of local
streets and highways and related drainage improvements that have been
damaged due to winter storms and flooding, and construction of
drainage improvements to mitigate future roadway flooding and damage
problems, in those jurisdictions that have been declared disaster
areas by the President of the United States, where the costs of those
repairs are ineligible for emergency funding with Federal Emergency
Relief (ER) funds or Federal Emergency Management Administration
(FEMA) funds.
   (f) (1) Cities and counties shall maintain their existing
commitment of local funds for street and highway maintenance,
rehabilitation, reconstruction, and storm damage repair in order to
remain eligible for the allocation of funds pursuant to paragraph (4)
or (5) of subdivision (c).
   (2) In order to receive any allocation pursuant to paragraph (4)
or (5) of subdivision (c), the city or county shall annually expend
from its general fund for street, road, and highway purposes an
amount not less than the annual average of its expenditures from its
general fund during the 1996-97, 1997-98, and 1998-99 fiscal years,
as reported to the Controller pursuant to Section 2151 of the Streets
and Highways Code.  For purposes of this paragraph, in calculating a
city's or county's annual general fund expenditures and its average
general fund expenditures for the 1996-97, 1997-98, and 1998-99
fiscal years, any unrestricted funds that the city or county may
expend at its discretion, including vehicle in-lieu tax revenues and
revenues from fines and forfeitures, expended for street and highway
purposes shall be considered expenditures from the general fund.
One-time allocations that have been expended for street and highway
purposes, but which may not be available on an ongoing basis,
including revenue provided under the Teeter Plan Bond Law of 1994
(Chapter 6.6 (commencing with Section 54773) of Part 1 of Division 2
of Title 5 of the Government Code, may not be considered when
calculating a city's or county's annual general fund expenditures.
   (3) For any city incorporated after July 1, 1996, the Controller
shall calculate an annual average of expenditure for the period
between July 1, 1996, and December 31, 2000, that the city was
incorporated.
   (4) For purposes of paragraph (2), the Controller may request
fiscal data from cities and counties in addition to data provided
pursuant to Section 2151, for the 1996-97, 1997-98, and 1998-99
fiscal years.  Each city and county shall furnish the data to the
Controller not later than 120 days after receiving the request.  The
Controller may withhold payment to cities and counties that do not
comply with the request for information or that provide incomplete
data.
   (5) The Controller may perform audits to ensure compliance with
paragraph (2) when deemed necessary.  Any city or county that has not
complied with paragraph (2) shall reimburse the state for the funds
it received during that fiscal year.  Any funds withheld or returned
as a result of a failure to comply with paragraph (2) shall be
reallocated to the other counties and cities whose expenditures are
in compliance.
   (6) If a city or county fails to comply with the requirements of
paragraph (2) in a particular fiscal year, the city or county may
expend during that fiscal year and the following fiscal year a total
amount that is not less than the total amount required to be expended
for those fiscal years for purposes of complying with paragraph (2).

   (7) The allocation made under paragraph (4) or (5) of subdivision
(c) shall be expended not later than the end of the fiscal year
following the fiscal year in which the allocation was made, and any
funds not expended within that period shall be returned to the
Controller and shall be reallocated to the other cities and counties
pursuant to the allocation formulas set forth in paragraph (4) or (5)
of subdivision (c).
   (g) The Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority
shall give first priority for using its share of the funds made
available under subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (2) of
subdivision (c) to providing the levels of bus service mandated under
the consent decree entered into by the authority on October 29,
1996, in the case of Labor/Community Strategy Center, et al. v. Los
Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
   (h) For the purpose of allocating funds under this section to
counties, cities, and a city and county, the Controller shall use the
most recent population estimates prepared by the Demographic
Research Unit of the Department of Finance.  For a city that
incorporated after January 1, 1998, that does not appear on the most
recent population estimates prepared by the Demographic Research
Unit, the Controller shall use the population determined for that
city under Section 11005.3 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.
   (i) This section shall become inoperative on the date that all
encumbrances incurred for the projects funded under paragraph (3) of
subdivision (c) have been liquidated or on June 30, 2006, whichever
date is later, and as of the January 1 immediately following that
date is repealed.
  SEC. 9.  Section 2182 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended
to read:
   2182.  (a) The funds appropriated from the Traffic Congestion
Relief Fund pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section  14556.5 of the
Government Code shall be allocated by the Controller to cities and
counties for street and road maintenance, rehabilitation, and
reconstruction.  Four hundred million dollars ($400,000,000) shall be
allocated to the counties, including a city and county, and cities,
including a city and county, as follows:
   (1) Fifty percent to the counties, including a city and county, in
accordance with the following formulas:

(A) Seventy-five percent of the funds payable under this paragraph
shall be apportioned among the counties in the proportion that the
number of fee-paid and exempt vehicles that are registered in the
county bears to the number of fee-paid and exempt vehicles registered
in the state.
   (B) Twenty-five percent of the funds payable under this paragraph
shall be apportioned among the counties in the proportion that the
number of miles of maintained county roads in each county bears to
the total number of miles of maintained county roads in the state.
For the purposes of apportioning funds under this subparagraph, any
roads within the boundaries of a city and county that are not state
highways shall be deemed to be county roads.
   (2) Fifty percent to cities, including a city and county,
apportioned among the cities in the proportion that the total
population of the city bears to the total population of all the
cities in the state.
   (b) Funds received under this section shall be deposited as
follows in order to avoid the commingling of those funds with other
local funds:
   (1) In the case of a city, into the city account that is
designated for the receipt of state funds allocated for
transportation purposes.
   (2) In the case of a county, into the county road fund.
   (3) In the case of a city and county, into a local account that is
designated for the receipt of state funds allocated for
transportation purposes.
   (c) Funds apportioned to a city or county under this section shall
be used only for street and highway pavement maintenance,
rehabilitation, and reconstruction of necessary associated facilities
such as drainage and traffic control devices.  Rehabilitation or
reconstruction may include widening necessary to bring the roadway
width to the desirable minimum pavement width consistent with
accepted design standards for local streets and roads, but does not
include widening or increasing the traffic capacity of a street or
road.
   (d) For the purpose of allocating funds under this section to
cities, counties, and a city and county, the Controller shall use the
most recent population estimates prepared by the Demographic
Research Unit of the Department of Finance.  For a city that
incorporated after January 1, 1998, that does not appear on the most
recent population estimates prepared by the Demographic Research
Unit, the Controller shall use the population determined for that
city under Section 11005.3 of the Revenue and Taxation Code.
  SEC. 10.  Section 2182.1 of the Streets and Highways Code is
amended to read:
   2182.1.  (a) The Legislature finds and declares that it intends
cities and counties to use the funds made available under subdivision
(b) of Section 14556.5 of the Government Code to supplement existing
local revenues being used for maintenance and rehabilitation of
local streets and roads. Cities and counties shall maintain their
existing commitment of local funds for maintenance and rehabilitation
of local streets and roads in order to remain eligible for
allocation and expenditure of the additional four hundred million
dollars ($400,000,000) made available by Section 21 of the act that
added this section.
   (b) In order to receive any allocation pursuant to Section 2182,
the city or county shall annually expend from its general fund for
street, road, and highway purposes an amount not less than the annual
average of its expenditures from its general fund during the
1996-97, 1997-98, and 1998-99 fiscal years, as reported to the
Controller pursuant to Section 2151.  For purposes of this
subdivision, in calculating a city's or county's annual general fund
expenditures and its average general fund expenditures for the
1996-97, 1997-98, and 1998-99 fiscal years, any unrestricted funds
that the city or county may expend at its discretion, including
vehicle in-lieu tax revenues and revenues from fines and forfeitures,
expended for street and highway purposes shall be considered
expenditures from the general fund.  One-time allocations that have
been expended for street and highway purposes, but which may not be
available on an ongoing basis, including revenue provided under the
Teeter Plan Bond Law of 1994 (Chapter 6.6 (commencing with Section
54773) of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the Government Code, may
not be considered when calculating a city's or county's annual
general fund expenditures.
   (c) For any city incorporated after July 1, 1996, the Controller
shall calculate an annual average of expenditure for the period
between July 1, 1996, and December 31, 2000, that the city was
incorporated.
   (d) For purposes of subdivision (b), the Controller may request
fiscal data from cities and counties in addition to data provided
pursuant to Section 2151, for the 1996-97, 1997-98, and 1998-99
fiscal years.  Each city and county shall furnish the data to the
Controller not later than 120 days after receiving the request.  The
Controller may withhold payment to cities and counties that do not
comply with the request for information or that provide incomplete
data.
   (e) The Controller may perform audits to ensure compliance with
subdivision (b) when deemed necessary.  Any city or county that has
not complied with subdivision (b) shall reimburse the state for the
funds it received during that fiscal year.  Any funds withheld or
returned as a result of a failure to comply with subdivision (b)
shall be reallocated to the other counties and cities whose
expenditures are in compliance.
   (f) If a city or county fails to comply with the requirements of
subdivision (b) in a particular fiscal year, the city or county may
expend during that fiscal year and the following fiscal year a total
amount that is not less than the total amount required to be expended
for those fiscal years for purposes of complying with subdivision
(b).
   (g) The allocation made under Section 2182 shall be expended not
later than the end of the fiscal year following the fiscal year in
which the allocation was made, and any funds not expended within that
period shall be returned to the Controller and shall be reallocated
to the other cities and counties pursuant to the allocation formulas
set forth in Section 2182.
  SEC. 11.  Section 21 of Chapter 91 of the Statutes of 2000 is
repealed.
  SEC. 12.  The following amounts are hereby appropriated for the
following purposes:
   (a) The sum of one million nine hundred thousand dollars
($1,900,000) from the Public Transportation Account in the State
Transportation Fund to the Capitol Corridors Joint Powers Authority
for the purpose of expanding intercity rail service in the Capitol
Corridor.
   (b) (1) The sum of twelve million dollars ($12,000,000) from the
Public Transportation Account in the State Transportation Fund to the
Bay Area Water Transit Authority to fund the environmental impact
reports and design functions specified in Chapter 1011 of the
Statutes of 1999.
   (2) Of the amount specified in paragraph (1), six million dollars
($6,000,000) shall be available no sooner than 30 days after the Bay
Area Water Transit Authority submits a work plan to the appropriate
legislative fiscal committees and the Joint Legislative Budget
Committee.  The work plan shall specify the intended work elements to
be accomplished in the budget year, when the work will be initiated
and is projected to be completed, and the cost associated with each
item of work.
  SEC. 13.  This act is an urgency statute necessary for the
immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety within
the meaning of Article IV of the Constitution and shall go into
immediate effect.  The facts constituting the necessity are:
   This act helps to create a significant program designed to reduce
traffic congestion, which will improve the health and safety of the
public.  In order for the program enhanced by this act to be
implemented as soon as possible, it is necessary that this take
effect immediately.
